How does the story end?

Does God reach the goal with His creation and all people, or rather not? These are questions about recent events. Different views shape the discussion. These are the most important views:

• The all-reconciliation (all-out reconciliation),
• the doctrine of heaven and hell and
• the doctrine of the destruction of all unbelievers
  (a variant on the heaven-and-hell doctrine).

These three “main types,” if that is how they are to be described, seek to understand the Bible’s various statements about the purpose and work of God. They appear in an overall understanding and one comes to one’s own conclusions based on the considerations. The following is a summary of important statements per teaching direction.

All reconciliation/all reconciliation

God will save(1Tim 4:9-11), justify(Rom 5:18), make alive(1Cor 15:22) all men. God, making peace through the blood of the cross, will reconcile the universe to Himself(Col 1:20) when Christ completes the universe in all things(Eph 1:23).

All things in heaven and on earth will be summed up in Christ(Eph 1:10). Then every knee will bow in the name of Jesus, the heavenly, the earthly and the subterranean, and every tongue will pay homage: Lord is Jesus Christ, to the glory of God the Father(Phil 2:9-11). Thus Christ will reign until the consummation of the living, when He will give the kingship to His God and Father, that God may be all in all(1 Cor. 15:24-28).

Death will be put away as the last enemy(1Cor 15,26), after which life and incorruption will be brought to light(2Tim 1,10). He includes all in unruliness, that He may have mercy on all(Rom 11:32). Everything is of Him, through Him, and to Him(Rom 11:36), which includes God’s judgments(Rom 11:33-35).

References to all-auspice are most clearly found in Paul’s letters, but not only there. In the Old Testament, too, there are many references such as “For the Lord does not afflict forever, but when he has afflicted, he shows mercy according to the abundance of his graces. For not from the heart does he humble and afflict the children of men”(Cl 3:31-33).

Those who believe in the all atonement do not do so because they see a conflict between God’s love and justice. Nor does he simply blank out the righteousness of God. Rather, the point is that God’s righteousness has been fulfilled in Christ(Rom 1:16-17 Rom 3:21), and it is through this that God’s action in love and for healing and salvation can take place in the first place. It is not God who is dependent on man, but man is and remains dependent on God, who speaks of judgment and grace and will one day be all in all(1 Cor. 15:28).

Interpretively summarized:
God has a clearly defined goal and achieves His goal through Christ(Christocentric).

Heaven and hell

Man must decide during his life where he wants to spend eternity. Either he believes (and goes to heaven) or he does not believe (and ends up in hell). It is a dualistic outcome of world history, wherein God makes an offer of salvation, but man decides whether to accept it or not. God is bound by this decision.

God does want all people to be saved(1Tim 2:4), but if people do not accept the love of the truth for their salvation, they will be lost(2Th 2:10). Only he who believes will not perish but have eternal life(John 3:16). He who does not believe is already judged because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God(John 3:18).

Thus it is appointed unto man once to die, and after this the judgment(Heb. 9:27). Accordingly, for those who do not believe, there remains a fearful expectation of judgment and the fervor of a fire that will consume the adversaries(Heb. 10:27).

We should fear the one who has the power to cast into hell after killing(Luke 12:5). If something causes a person to sin, it should be radically cut off or thrown away, for it is better to enter life lame or crippled or one-eyed than to be cast into hell unharmed(Mark 9:43-48).

Thus, at some point, there will be a separation between (good) sheep and (bad) goats(Matt. 25:32). The goats will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous will enter into eternal life(Mt 25:46). The last judgment is followed by the second death in the lake of fire(Rev 20:11-15). This death is not an actual death, but whoever ends up here will be kept alive and tormented by God for all eternity(Rev 20:10, cf. Rev 14:11).

There is a variant on these formulations: In a variation, hell is described again and again today as “the time or world without God”, as “God’s remoteness”. This has the appearance of wanting to make the doctrine of heaven and hell acceptable, namely to push the fire and eternal torment into the background. Of course, this terminology is only like a wolf in sheep’s clothing, because if you want to get to the bottom of the reasons for God’s remoteness, you automatically come back to the original thoughts of a hell.

Interpretively summarized:
God wants to save, but only a small part of mankind can He actually save – namely only those who have consciously “decided” during their life and let themselves be saved. Unfortunately, He cannot save the rest and they will be tormented forever, for which they will be kept alive by God endlessly. The positive end result is minimal. God does not reach His original goal. In terms of the basis of salvation, this teaching is Christocentric. However, with regard to the realization and completion of salvation, the doctrine is anthropocentric, because everything depends on man and his decision in this life.

Destruction of the infidels

The disposal of the infidels. This view also envisions a dualistic outcome of world history with heaven and hell. Hell, however, is not endless torment, but extinction. The destruction of the unbelievers takes the place of endless torment.

For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish (here we read: be destroyed), but have everlasting life(John 3:16). If anyone was not found written in the book of life at the last judgment, he was thrown into the lake of fire(Rev 20:15). This is interpreted as annihilation because it is a contrast to life – that is, it cannot contain any other form of life.

Likewise, Heb 10:27 speaks of a fire that will “consume” the adversaries, which is tantamount to destruction. The Gospels read that “soul and body can be corrupted in hell”(Mt 10:28).

Proponents reject the doctrine of an endless torment in hell on the grounds that an endless torment as punishment for a relatively short life full of mistakes is not fitting and casts a blight on God’s nature and work. Annihilation is more appropriate and fits better with the testimony of Scripture. They see death as annihilation, and death is spoken of far more often than torment.

Interpretively summarized:
Only a small part of humanity is actually saved. The rest will be disposed of permanently. This, it is believed, is a humane solution that will also free God from the stain and injustice of endless torment. What remains, then, is only a saved crowd of people who have consciously allowed themselves to be saved. Conspicuous when reading through corresponding texts is the lack of a divine purpose for all people. God does not seem to have a goal, but only a course of history, in which different switches are built in, over which destinies are steered. Here, too, the basis of salvation is conveyed Christocentrically, but man himself is ultimately the one responsible for his final destiny(anthropocentric thinking).

The attempt to lean on the Bible

This is how the different views stand side by side. How an exegesis of the mentioned biblical passages might look like is not yet the question here. This is an introduction and the scriptures mentioned are an incomplete selection of references. However, some things can already be recognized: All opinions try to base themselves on the Bible. In churches and communities, one is often confronted with only one point of view. Other opinions remain unmentioned. Not infrequently, therefore, I hear that something like an all atonement is not in the Bible at all. The texts which say this are avoided as much as possible and are therefore unknown. The biblical passages mentioned here should help to correct the wrong impression. It is also assumed that proponents of all-auspices are probably unaware of the biblical passages to the contrary. In this article, this impression should be corrected right away.

Bible study helps

Quoting biblical passages alone, however, says nothing. Each passage should be examined in light of the basic text and context. Therefore, on this website there are many neutral contributions on how to study the Bible reliably and profitably. This is intended to support an examination and a differentiated, thoughtful and personal opinion on biblical statements. Therefore now the concrete invitation: If you have questions, then deal with these things. Try to trace why this or that is said.

If you don’t have any questions, even the best answers won’t help. Then just leave those things and enjoy other things. Everything may lead to gratitude.

Deepening

Many questions can be explored in greater depth by working together – provided, of course, that everyone in a discussion group is willing to do so. The desire to know the Bible better can be a unifying element in conversation. In countless conversations I have had myself, it often happened that people entrenched themselves in dogmatic positions. However, the conversation suffers from this and it prevents talking about the Bible in an “open-ended” way. Let us always remember that knowledge inflates, but love builds up.

• Have you ever heard other doctrines along with the arguments?
• Is it important to think about these issues? Why (not)?
• What do other doctrines trigger in you? (uncertainty, joy, indifference, …)

See also

A deepening of biblical themes presupposes that we can also study the Bible. How can we get to know the Bible better and how can doctrines be tested?

• How can a particular doctrine be tested?